From: YourName@YourISP.com   
      
   In article <060420161847457979%YourName@YourISP.com>, Your Name   
    wrote:   
   > In article <00000c22@net396.fidonet.org>, Jimmy Anderson   
   > <@p0.f45.n396.z1[ASC46]fidonet[.]org> wrote:   
   > > + User FidoNet address: 1:396/45   
   > > -=> Your Name wrote to All <=-   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > For those silly enough to pay money for talentless JJ Abrams' lazy   
   > > > > > reboot crap ...   
   > > > >   
   > > > > Or, for those fans that loved the movie and want to own a digital   
   > > > > copy... (yes - there are contrary opinions)   
   > > >   
   > > > There aren't. There may be people silly enough to like the movie, but   
   > > > pretty much everyone agrees it was simply a lazy reboot of the   
   > > > originals.   
   > >   
   > > "Pretty much everyone" - where do you get your data? Sounds like you   
   > > and I know different people... Or are you getting "media data" and   
   > > not hearing from real people?   
   >   
   > Anyone with eyes and a brain who has seen it can tell it's just a lazy   
   > reboot. Virtually every review says it too.   
      
   And yet more proof (not that it's needed) from the review of the DVD /   
   Blu-ray release ...   
      
       "Although set 30 years after the event of Return of   
        the Jedi, narrative similarities with A New Hope   
        are unavoidable ..."   
      
   Narrative similarities = polite way of saying rip-off.   
      
   Ripping off the original movie(s) certainly wasn't "unavoidable",   
   except when you hire a talentless git to be in charge of making a lazy   
   reboot.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)